IMHO, those governors and elected officials who are backing voter suppression need to be

[Cleita]

investigated by the Secretarys of State of their states and our Justice Department in the case of federal officials. Then they should be indicted for treason, if an investigation shows treason has happened. They have sworn an oath to obey and protect the Constitution of their respective states and in the case of federal elected officials the Constitution of the United States. To violate those oaths is treason. Why isn't this happening?

Why do we at the grass roots always have to grind out the vote and now in this case, try to get people IDs that don't have the ones they want? It seems after the stolen election of 2000, we should have made voting transparent and available to all citizens as outlined in our Constitution. Why are we still on the other side of the fence? I believe it's because we haven't called these corrupt officials on the violations of their oaths of office and it has make them bold in seeking and winning elected offices to further corrupt our system.

[cali]

1. well, many of the Secretaries of State are repubs, so that's not a solution.

And investigated for what? Seriously, I think the better avenue is to contest the laws passed that restrict voters' rights.

As for treason, sigh. This is NOT, under the law, treasonous activity. I wish people would stop with the treason bullshit. It's such a wingnutty thing.

[Cleita]

2. If you take an oath to uphold the Constitution and you violate that oath

it supposedly is treason. However, it seems everyone makes up their own rules about this.

http://www.wisegeek.com/what-is-an-oath-of-office.htm

Once someone has taken an oath of office, the terms of the office may mean that violating the oath can result in being tried for treason or high crimes. In other cases, violating the oath of office will result in simple impeachment or removal from office. When preparing to take office, people usually go over the responsibilities and rights of the position so that they understand what they are committing to when they take the oath publicly.

[cali]

3. yes, it's all in the interpretation isn't it?

And you'd have to investigate the vast majority of politicians using your apparent standard.

[Cleita]

4. That's because the practice has become so acceptable that

corruption has become mainstream. That is what I'm objecting to. I lived in South America. I know what political corruption is like and in fifty years I have seen us becoming closer and closer to those governments than is comfortable for me. One of the things back in 1961 when I became eligible to vote, was that I was confident that my vote would count and that we could weed out corrupt elected officials with our vote. I'm not confident of that anymore.